Message-ID: <3D7B4467.3030004@csi.com>
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2002 08:36:55 -0400
From: John Colagioia <JColagioia@csi.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Subject: Re: [CONTENT] Puzzle fairness
References: <Xns927E49EEAB383joaomendesnetcabopt@194.65.14.158> <3D7A1E03.5060706@csi.com> <3d7a26ca$0$3938$b45e6eb0@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: ool-182f30fa.dyn.optonline.net
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: ool-182f30fa.dyn.optonline.net
X-Trace: excalibur.gbmtech.net 1031488044 ool-182f30fa.dyn.optonline.net (8 Sep 2002 08:27:24 -0400)
Organization: ProNet USA Inc.
Lines: 39
X-Authenticated-User: jnc
Path: news.duke.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!news-hog.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.abs.net!uunet!dca.uu.net!excalibur.gbmtech.net!not-for-mail
Xref: news.duke.edu rec.arts.int-fiction:108414

D. Jacob Wildstrom wrote:
> In article <3D7A1E03.5060706@csi.com>,
> John Colagioia  <JColagioia@csi.com> wrote:
>>that I'll try shooting everything and everyone.  Telling me, "that's
>>naughty," is just going to frustrate me enough to quit, in all
>>probability.
> Well, to me it depends how well the protagonist's defined. For
> instance, in "Plundered Hearts", there are a lot of things which, as a
> well-bred lady, you are unable or unwilling to do.

I think I did say something, somewhere about the depth of the PC, but
since you brought it up, as I recall, I thought "Plundered Hearts"
worked well because there was always something *natural* to do, so
that the player didn't feel that frustration that might drive him to
act somewhat as a sociopath.

> It is reasonable to
> prevent even an everyman character from behaving abhorrently; we can
> assume that the everyman has at least _some_ morality. I would
> consider a mild rebuke in response to, say, "HIT OLD CRIPPLED BEGGAR"
> or "STEAL MY FRIEND'S PRIZE-WINNING EGGPLANT" to be appropriate under
> most circumstances.

I would *much* rather have consequences--even "The crippled beggar
grabs your friend's prize-winning eggplant and bashes you on the head
with it. Hey, the jerk's eggplant was made out of concrete, you
realize, as your skull splinters under the impact..."

 From the author's standpoint, it's effectively the same thing
(slapping the player's wrist for being a cretin), but it no longer
comes off as an attempt to impose a moral code.

And, as I said, an even better solution is to disallow the action by
not providing the temptation.  Guns are used to shoot things.  If
you, the author, don't want me, the player, shooting things, then
don't provide a gun.  Providing it but not letting me use it gives
the image of the author sitting back, waiting for me to jump through
his next hoop.  At least, that's the impression it gives me.

